Donk-fold river?

First of all I don't mind capping here.
second on the flop i would raise if he raises call down.

as played check call.

from his side if i were him (his stats is similar to mine) I would be betting almost anything here. 8x, lots of pps, AK. sometimes even 5x depending on your stats

Regarding stats: He probably sees about the same thing as I see in his stats. He probably doesn't have many 8 or worse in his range, he is 3-betting vs a very nitty UTG coward.

Check/raising the flop is better than donking the river. You still are in pretty good shape against CO's 3betting range and you prevent him for taking a freecard w/A high on the turn. Your hand seems a bit high in your range (this is the top of your calling range I suppose?) to donk/fold the river.

Check-raising flop is actually horrible, not an option, just have a look in Equilab. We aren't favorites, either against a tight or a fairly wide range. If he is tight, he has you, if he is wider he still has you because now the Q really hits him.

Capping preflop is an option, but that would force me to change my whole game-plan.

He is still a favorite on the river, probably like a 55-70% favorite. (Equilab again. It depends on if he c-bet's AK/AJ on turn.) The thing with betting is that we are calling anyway if he bets, and the last bet goes in better if we make it ourselves because now he'll be deeply suspicious (look at the board) and call with close to 100% of his range that doesn't contain a Q. Unlike Avataren, I don't think he is betting less than a pair and that is probably 99 or TT+. Not much I beat in his river betting range.

Edit: To make my point clear: He is not checking back a better hand (KK!), no way.
If he bets, he has 85% equity (or something like that) in the last bet.
If I bet (he'll call with all Ax and all pairs due to the board and the donk) he has only 55-70% equity in the last bet.

What is happening is that I make a bet go in also those times when I'm actually ahead instead of almost exclusively when I'm behind.

as a default i'd play like Yohan and check/call the river. nothing fancy.
check/raising the flop isn't horrible if you donkcheck the turn on any card, but playing like this necessitates changes in your overall strategy. check/raising and betting the turn is no good

Well, even against a tight 3betting range (77+, A9s+, KQs, ATo+, KQo) you still have a small equity edge with JJ. If you make that range tighter, you remove the KQ combos wich improve your equity.

The reasons I see to not check/raise is because you already have a lot to check/raise for value. TP+ is about 30% on your range which seems fine. Maybe I missed something on that hand or simply I misunderstood how much I should check/raise for value on the flop.

Originally posted by redskwerl
check/raising and betting the turn is no good

May I ask why?

i second that redskwerl why ?

Originally posted by Siliciom
Well, even against a tight 3betting range (77+, A9s+, KQs, ATo+, KQo) you still have a small equity edge with JJ. If you make that range tighter, you remove the KQ combos wich improve your equity.
...

Originally posted by redskwerl
check/raising and betting the turn is no good

May I ask why?

This is definitely not a tight 3-betting range. It is loose against a TAG opening UTG. Even so, the thing is that you can't push a small equity edge (even if you actually have one) for value because you are out of position. You won't get paid in full when ahead and will be forced to pay the maximum price when behind. Also, making that range tighter involves rinsing AT and AJ before KQ (because of domination).

The guy is 3-betting 9% over all.

It's roughly 9% of 3bet, which is the 3bet % of your opponent

Yeah he could be a bit tighter given your UTG raise, but a lot of those nits aren't varying their 3betting range from position, it a bit like capping ranges. Now, if you've got a read, ignore that.

Sorry but I have to disagree. If you checkraise the flop, than you have to bet the turn. What are your other options? If you are not going to bet the turn, than don't checkraise the flop.

Originally posted by redskwerl
as a default i'd play like Yohan and check/call the river. nothing fancy.
check/raising the flop isn't horrible if you donkcheck the turn on any card, but playing like this necessitates changes in your overall strategy. check/raising and betting the turn is no good

Not necessarily. In the same way that some bluffs should be given up, some thin value hands cease to be thin value hands OTT. This must be balanced , otherwise the opponent can read a check for weakness very accurately. I personally don't donk-check thin value (I check-call the street before it) because of the extra trouble of setting up ranges for it.

Originally posted by saltbeef
Sorry but I have to disagree. If you checkraise the flop, than you have to bet the turn. What are your other options?

Your other option is to check.

I actually had an opponent who donk-folded today:D

Donking is a bad idea. If you were not ahead on the flop you are not ahead OTR. If the opponent is agressive and overly SD bound, who is not capable of folding Ax here, plus fights back with top pair, then x/r-ing the flop is better than x/c-ig IMO. I'd x/f on an A x/c on a K if he is capable of bluffing enough Ax or lower pairs and bet down on everything else. Against someone who is more foldy and passive vs aggression I'd > x/c >> x/c >>> x/c or x/f depending on river c-bet stats+reads

Not necessarily. In the same way that some bluffs should be given up, some thin value hands cease to be thin value hands OTT. This must be balanced , otherwise the opponent can read a check for weakness very accurately.

This is not necessarily true. If your donk x range is weak enough then your opponent cant exploit it even if you fold 100% of the time, because he wont be able to bet a worse hand.

Donking is a bad idea. If you were not ahead on the flop you are not ahead OTR.

You don't need to be ahead to make betting better than check-calling.

If you think are behind on the flop, then x/r flop (+ keeping firing) is a bad idea (you are the bluffing with a hand that gives you exactly 0 fold equity), I hope you agree.

While still behind OTR (if you get there by check-calling), the logic and mathematics is much different. I though you knew that. You should. It is exactly the mathematics of bet-folding versus check-calling. Needless to say, bet-folding IP and OPP are two entirely different animals. You don't ever bet-fold without being a favorite IP if called. But this you can and should do OOP in some spots (like this one imo).

This is not necessarily true. If your donk x range is weak enough then your opponent cant exploit it even if you fold 100% of the time, because he wont be able to bet a worse hand.

And why, may I ask, do we not have to balance the donk-check range of all ranges? (The exploitation of your example is easy, near trivial. Try to figure out how you would go about. HINT: Some fish might do the right thing nearly automatically.)

You don't need to be ahead to make betting better than check-calling.

Could you expand on this ?

How could <check> < <bet> be true if EQ<50% ?

And why, may I ask,...

I already mentioned this, and I can only repeat myself: if the worst hand your opponent can bet is better than the best hand you check then there is no way he can exploit you even if he knows for sure that you're gonna x/f 100%

Originally posted by kavboj84

And why, may I ask,...

I already mentioned this, and I can only repeat myself: if the worst hand your opponent can bet is better than the best hand you check then there is no way he can exploit you even if he knows for sure that you're gonna x/f 100%

Yes, there is. It becomes profitable to slowplay. That is to say, check behind give you a free card drawing dead. Either you will be temped to bluff or you might pick up a bluff catcher and call a river bet. This is why I hinted that fish sometimes automatically would get this right.

I'll expand on bet-folding later. I am hungry.

Betting and folding:

It is pretty common for bet-folding being better than check-calling. This by itself doesn't say whether you need to be a favorite to bet (for value!). The deciding factor is the EV when the choice is between bet-calling and check-calling.

The first step is to estimate five ranges on part of your opponent:

• If you check, what is his betting range?
• If you check, what is his check behind range?

Next, suppose you bet:

• If you bet, what is his folding range?
• If you bet, what is his calling range?
• If you bet, what is his raising range?

If the ranges are as such;

• he will bet (for value) if and only if he beats you if you check,
• he will call with hands that you beat if you bet,
• he is unlikely to raise as a bluff,

then betting and folding to a raise shows more profit than checking and calling. To see why, suppose he does have you beat. You will lose one bet in either case. Suppose you have him beat. Then there are hands (M of them) against which you gain an extra bet, since he wouldn't bet them if you check but calls with the when you bet. There are also hands (N of them) that he will now not bluff, but fold. If M > N, then you have candidate for bet-folding. The last thing to consider is is the chance he will raise as a bluff. This needs to be very small and depends on the pot size.

As you can see, the equity doesn't enter into the calculation, and this is entirely rigorous (once you set up the two EV equations and compare them). It is a prerequisite that you are not contemplating check-folding and you are out of position.

The posted hand is a candidate, but a perfect candidate would be (same board and opponent) 99 in the hole. Now I think it is reasonable to say that he bets (for value) if and only if he has you beat. Suppose he is reasonably balanced. The only downside to bet-folding then is the risk of getting raised out by a bluff. I take the board and his total range as a guarantee that he'll bluff-raise little. All A high will seem to him better to call with, and he has very few small SC kind of hands that are useless for bluff-catching. If he has them, I doubt he has the courage to raise as a bluff very much. He is, like me, a total nit:f_biggrin:

Many fish almost get this right. They miss a crucial point though. They donk-call instead of donk-fold on hopeless boards.

Here is a sample total range before the action OTR, a tight one to illustrate the point (with 99 in hole, not JJ):

Board: Q♦5♥8♠ 2♥ Q♥
       Equity     Win     Tie
MP2    23.73%  22.89%   0.85% { 99 }
CO     76.27%  75.42%   0.85% { 88+, ATs+, KJs+, QJs, T9s, AQo }

In this case, he is not going to bet with with 9 combos of Axs, but will probably call a bet. If you bet, he will not be able to bluff with 3 combos of KJs and 3 combos of T9s (if that is what he had in mind). So you might net an extra bet against 3 combos by bet-folding, but be warned, see below.

He'll be raising with 3 nut flushes and 1 QQ. What he does with the 9 combos of trips and weak flushes, I don't know. He should probably raise one combo as a bluff. On balance, against this range, it is too risky to bet-fold. The point is that it is still close, in spite of the fact that he is a 76% favorite.

Now lets say he is looser and a little unbalanced and plays sub-optimal post-flop. By that I mean that he fires a second c-bet when he shouldn't, and doesn't have any small SC (T9s gone).

Board: Q♦5♥8♠ 2♥ Q♥
       Equity     Win     Tie
MP2    40.87%  40.36%   0.51% { 99 }
CO     59.13%  58.62%   0.51% { 88+, A8s+, KJs+, QJs, AJo+, KQo, QJo }

His second c-bet with most of the A high are bad because no better hand is folding, and few worse hands are calling. He isn't a favorite and, besides, he has showdown value. Now there are plenty of Ax that will call a bet on the river, but will not fire a third bullet (he isn't that bad). His range still a favorite against 99! From his point of view, which hands are better to raise with (as a bluff) than to call with? I'd say that none is. There are 30+ combos that you might gain an extra bet against (compared to check-calling) if he never bluff raises on that river when you bet. Remove a few combos that now cannot bluff by betting.

The typical situation in micro stakes is when you have initiative. Then most players automatically will bet-fold things like second pair on the river (as a slight non-favorite). It's no issue. What this thread is about is bet-folding without initiative a k a donk-folding, which is (perhaps rightly so) considered fishy.

I have the feeling that initiative is taken too seriously when all the cards are dealt out. The time for semi-bluffs is gone, the way we got to the river doesn't matter, except for putting opponents on ranges, not only their total range, but split up as in the previous post.